Last week I wrote a commentary entitled, “Can You Hear Me Now?” Now we know. The unqualified, loud, resounding answer is “No. N-O, No.”
For topical purposes, “Can you hear me (us) now” was a question posed to President Barack Hussein Obama by terrorists after the Boston Marathon bombings – or as sane, fed-up call it terrorism.
April 20, the day after the terrorist acts, Obama said, “This was a heinous and cowardly act,” and called the mass destruction events a “tragedy”. As of this writing, this president still refuses to call these planned mayhems what they are: pure, unadulterated terrorism.
It gets worse. Obama and his minions are prosecuting the radical Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in civilian court not as the terrorist enemy combatant he truly is. White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama’s “entire national security team supports the decision.” The do-gooders claim that a U.S. law precludes American citizens from being tried as enemy combatants.
Is anyone that we can actually trust going to verify that claim, or is this some circuitous stretch of “interpretation” by Obama-ites like Attorney General Eric Holder? Considering Holder’s past pick-and-choose mode of operation, do you believe him? I don’t.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
If, big word IF, what they claim is true, then boy, do we as a country need to look at immigration with deeper scrutiny – like the same level of scrutiny used on people who want to buy a gun legally. We need to consider the nationalities of those we are allowing to come here, including those entering the country for schooling. And no, I do not care about “profiling.” If that is what it takes, then that’s the way it is. The safety of America is primary.
Obama emoted his usual kid-glove handling immediately. Within hours of the bombings, deaths and maimings, he said, “There’s a temptation to latch on to any bit of information, sometimes to jump to conclusions. … But when a tragedy like this happens … it’s important that we do this right. … That’s why we have investigations … That’s why we have courts. And that’s why we take care not to rush to judgment — not about the motivations of these individuals; certainly not about entire groups of people.”
This advice is a selective new stance from President Obama when we consider how he had no problem immediately giving his opinion when his Harvard professor friend Henry Louis Gates Jr. was duly arrested for his disorderly conduct with a local police officer. Obama quickly and erroneously opined, “But I think it’s fair to say, No. 1, any of us would be pretty angry; No. 2, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, No. 3 … that there’s a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.” The incident, Obama said, shows “how race remains a factor in this society.”
President Obama didn’t blink before thrusting his opinion into the highly controversial Trayvon Martin case by saying, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” Really? How does he know that? One could call that remark racist, and it would have been, if someone other than Obama uttered those same words.
Many people had a good idea what kind of evil mindset was behind the marathon massacre, but they didn’t immediately take to the airwaves and start naming groups.
Not so for liberals. Clearly the left did not listen to their beloved president’s recent advice.
CNN’s national security analyst, the disheveled-looking Peter Bergen, gave his first report, i.e opinion, to CNN anchor Jake Tapper, saying, “Once the device, if it is a device, is found – what kind of explosives were used? So for instance, if it was hydrogen peroxide, this is a signature of al-Qaida. If it was more conventional explosives, which are much harder to get hold of now – that might be some other kind of right-wing extremist.” Note that he remarked on al-Qaida and then said “some other kind of right-wing extremist” as if the right and al-Qaida are interchangeable.
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews screeched his predictable no-facts blame stating, “Normally, domestic terrorists, people tend to be on the far right, well that’s not a good category, just extremists, let’s call them that.”
The leftist New York Times’ Nick Kristoff believes if the ATF simply had a named, permanent director, this would not have happened, but most of all he blamed Republicans for not having the director in place. Of course he has absolutely zero support of the allegation that an ATF director would have stopped these Boston bombings.
This leads me to ask: Are these committed leftists sleep-deprived? Because they lie awake on 24-hour alert to think of ways and links to blame Republicans for absolutely everything that is wrong or evil. Clearly their mirrors are cracked.
The country will be forced to endure the hand-wringing of “Oh, why did they do it?” That’s already been put out there by Tom Brokaw. Millions of dollars will be spent on “investigations” and countless hours will be spent by committees searching for the answers.
Hey, federal bureaucracy, save your time and taxpayer money. These terrorist acts occur because an identified sect hates America, and they continue to wreak as much havoc, destruction and pain as possible.
Period.
Wake up and man up. They cannot be appeased.
Betty Arenson has lived in the SCV since 1968 and describes herself as a conservative who’s concerned about progressives’ politics and their impacts on the country, her children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. She says she is unashamed to own a gun or a Bible, couldn’t care less about the color of the president’s skin, and demands that he uphold his oath to protect and follow the Constitution of the United States in its entirety. Her commentary publishes Fridays.
The Answer is 'No' | Commentary by Betty Arenson
